So, after COX Communications lost all my e-mail messages older than 150 days and stopped delivering email message to my account with them for about 5 days it decided to credit my account with the incredible amount of $5. A one time credit.
Incredibly arrogant and shortsighted. COX Communication is the worst cable and internet services delivery company. Without any doubt.
Stay away from COX, if you can. If I could not use COX where I live I would never in a million years do business with them.
Now COX claims that I have not been paying for email services, in spite of the fact that I pay for internet alone about $65/mo. Not to speak of the fact that they advertise email access and account as one of the differentiating services compared to the competition.
Incredibly frustrating.
Here is the exact reply I got from their customer care team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am sorry for the issue you are experiencing with our webmail.
Please
keep in mind you subscribe to access to the Internet and we offer the
email as a complimentary service at no additional charge.
A $5.00 credit
had been issued to your account and you will see this on the next
statement. Teams across all levels of our organization remain intensely
focused on the restoration efforts. Unfortunately, we do not expect
services to be restored today. We do understand the impact this is
having on our customers, which is why we have deployed every resource
possible to working this issue. While we are focused on restoring email
access as quickly as possible, the multiple components and processes
that make up our email system require care, and some time, to bring them
back online. We will provide additional updates on our website. We
sincerely apologize for the inconvenience this is causing you.
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Sunday, December 16, 2012
The Nature of Credit (II)
Credit is an amazing economic instrument.
Credit is the primary vehicle through which we communicate and translate economic values across times. An individual who has an excess of resources today can use them to either pay back expenses made in the past or to support other businesses who will pay them back in the future. Time can be traded just like any other goods or services.This is astounding.
It is astounding because, given credit and perfect rationality, the amount of economic activity at any given time should be always focused on the present. When this does not happen we have an economic crisis, be it depression, recession, or inflation.
So, if today I know that I have an excess of resources I should be able to pretty easily pay back past obligations and sustain the excess of resources for the future, via credit. My natural inclination would be to be in a perfect balance today as I know that, if current conditions persist, I can sustain the balance going forward.
If I make $1,000 this week and need to pay for my past loans $200 and save for future growth $200 then the $600 left over should be sufficient for living. If I save even more than $200 then I will have even less resources today but this implies that I am optimistic about the future.
Bring the government into this equation and we will see how they take away any and all incentives to save for the future while trying to decrease the value of my past loan obligations.
Now, -if I have the same job- I still make $1,000 this week and government (via the central bank) decides that the value of credit should be less than it used to be (using quantitative easing, for instance).
So, I used to owe $200 for past loans and now they are worth $150 while the value of saving for the future also decreases by $50. So, I have $700 left to spend. What should I do with the extra $100? Well, if cost of living went up and state and local taxes went up I may end up with nothing more than I used to have before. All the federal government did was to make private businesses and sate/local governments charge more for the same goods and services. The net effect is 0 (at the very best). There are other cases where the net effect of the government actions is at most 0 and very few where the effects are greater than 0.
We are slaves to the central bank's actions and they have a very thin hit zone of success.
Another outcome to consider is listed below.
If I do not pay my $200 loan at all this will enable me to have more resources today but this also signals that the degree of risk in the economy is not well quantified. Higher risks imply higher returns and higher values of the credit costs. Contrary to expectations and economic theory, this has not happened at all. If I save more then I am not rational as the interest rates are too low.
So, I can either invest the money or spend it all.
The central bank is practically forcing us to take actions against or best individual interests. Think about it for a second. A government body not elected by us is telling us what is best for us... At least economically. If there are no economic freedoms then we have no other kinds of freedoms.
Credit is an amazing instrument until the government dilutes its value to almost nothing.
Credit is the primary vehicle through which we communicate and translate economic values across times. An individual who has an excess of resources today can use them to either pay back expenses made in the past or to support other businesses who will pay them back in the future. Time can be traded just like any other goods or services.This is astounding.
It is astounding because, given credit and perfect rationality, the amount of economic activity at any given time should be always focused on the present. When this does not happen we have an economic crisis, be it depression, recession, or inflation.
So, if today I know that I have an excess of resources I should be able to pretty easily pay back past obligations and sustain the excess of resources for the future, via credit. My natural inclination would be to be in a perfect balance today as I know that, if current conditions persist, I can sustain the balance going forward.
If I make $1,000 this week and need to pay for my past loans $200 and save for future growth $200 then the $600 left over should be sufficient for living. If I save even more than $200 then I will have even less resources today but this implies that I am optimistic about the future.
Bring the government into this equation and we will see how they take away any and all incentives to save for the future while trying to decrease the value of my past loan obligations.
Now, -if I have the same job- I still make $1,000 this week and government (via the central bank) decides that the value of credit should be less than it used to be (using quantitative easing, for instance).
So, I used to owe $200 for past loans and now they are worth $150 while the value of saving for the future also decreases by $50. So, I have $700 left to spend. What should I do with the extra $100? Well, if cost of living went up and state and local taxes went up I may end up with nothing more than I used to have before. All the federal government did was to make private businesses and sate/local governments charge more for the same goods and services. The net effect is 0 (at the very best). There are other cases where the net effect of the government actions is at most 0 and very few where the effects are greater than 0.
We are slaves to the central bank's actions and they have a very thin hit zone of success.
Another outcome to consider is listed below.
If I do not pay my $200 loan at all this will enable me to have more resources today but this also signals that the degree of risk in the economy is not well quantified. Higher risks imply higher returns and higher values of the credit costs. Contrary to expectations and economic theory, this has not happened at all. If I save more then I am not rational as the interest rates are too low.
So, I can either invest the money or spend it all.
The central bank is practically forcing us to take actions against or best individual interests. Think about it for a second. A government body not elected by us is telling us what is best for us... At least economically. If there are no economic freedoms then we have no other kinds of freedoms.
Credit is an amazing instrument until the government dilutes its value to almost nothing.
It's impossible to claim innocence
Friday's massacre in Newtown, CT where 20 children under the age of 7 and 6 adults were killed by a young adult shows with the precision of a metronome what lack of government regulations can do.
It is almost impossible to claim that the government could not have done anything about this when it is clear that the opposite is true. Mostly when these types of massacres occur at least 10 times a year.
Here are several ways the government could have made this massacre much more difficult to perpetrate (if not prevent it).
1. Access to guns. Most criminals and mentally challenged individuals get (buy or steal) their guns from other 'law abiding' citizens. Controlling guns at the source and imposing yearly checks on the storage of guns and ammunition in private hands could be a starting point;
2. Mental health. If anybody in a household gets diagnosed with a mental disorder all guns/ammo in the household need to be sold immediately;
3. Judicial clarity. Have the Supreme Court clarify the scope of the 2nd amendment so that stronger restrictions be placed on all guns already in private hands;
All 3 branches of the USG have failed to fulfill their main Constitutional duty: to allow to the 26 innocent victims of this infuriating event to seek 'life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness'. Their lives were taken away from them and the government cannot claim innocence.
It is impossible for the government to assert that it could not have done anything to prevent this event when these types of events happen with an alarming regularity.
Our government can muster the resources and the legal constructs to chase/kill/incarcerate/isolate terrorists away no matter where they are on the globe, but it cannot do anything to prevent these types of atrocities?
If Al-Qaeda would have been behind any of these types of awful mass shootings then the government would have created a new set of rules. Immediately and without recourse.Just like the 'Patriot' Act. Only the name is patriotic in that act, and yet the government has managed to make it the new law of the land rather quickly...
It is almost impossible to claim that the government could not have done anything about this when it is clear that the opposite is true. Mostly when these types of massacres occur at least 10 times a year.
Here are several ways the government could have made this massacre much more difficult to perpetrate (if not prevent it).
1. Access to guns. Most criminals and mentally challenged individuals get (buy or steal) their guns from other 'law abiding' citizens. Controlling guns at the source and imposing yearly checks on the storage of guns and ammunition in private hands could be a starting point;
2. Mental health. If anybody in a household gets diagnosed with a mental disorder all guns/ammo in the household need to be sold immediately;
3. Judicial clarity. Have the Supreme Court clarify the scope of the 2nd amendment so that stronger restrictions be placed on all guns already in private hands;
All 3 branches of the USG have failed to fulfill their main Constitutional duty: to allow to the 26 innocent victims of this infuriating event to seek 'life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness'. Their lives were taken away from them and the government cannot claim innocence.
It is impossible for the government to assert that it could not have done anything to prevent this event when these types of events happen with an alarming regularity.
Our government can muster the resources and the legal constructs to chase/kill/incarcerate/isolate terrorists away no matter where they are on the globe, but it cannot do anything to prevent these types of atrocities?
If Al-Qaeda would have been behind any of these types of awful mass shootings then the government would have created a new set of rules. Immediately and without recourse.Just like the 'Patriot' Act. Only the name is patriotic in that act, and yet the government has managed to make it the new law of the land rather quickly...
Cox Communications Sucks Again
Starting with yesterday I have not been able to access my Cox Communication e-mail account. Mind you, I am paying them +$65/mo for the Internet access they provide.
Here is what they promise. Yet, I cannot get to my e-mail account at all.
And this is what the alert says.
Our teams are making progress in our email service restoration efforts. Through our investigation, we have isolated the cause of the failure to the email system platform which ultimately affected both the primary and secondary failover (back-up) systems. Currently, all incoming messages are queued in our system and we expect to deliver messages to customers on a rolling basis as we bring the systems back online. Teams across all levels of our organization remain intensely focused on the restoration efforts. Unfortunately, we do not expect services to be restored today. We do understand the impact this is having on our customers, which is why we have deployed every resource possible to working this issue. While we are focused on restoring email access as quickly as possible, the multiple components and processes that make up our email system require care, and some time, to bring them back online. Our next scheduled update is 3:00 pm, however we will update this alert with new information as we have it.
Need I say more than the fact that Cox is the worst 'utility providers' company I am dealing with?
I hate having to do business with this company but they are a virtual monopoly in this city.
Here is what they promise. Yet, I cannot get to my e-mail account at all.
WebMail
Logging in here will allow you to:
- Access up to 10 email accounts with 2GB of storage space each
- Compose new messages to contacts from your Address Book
- Manage SpamBlocker and other advanced email tools
- Search for current and saved messages
And this is what the alert says.
Our teams are making progress in our email service restoration efforts. Through our investigation, we have isolated the cause of the failure to the email system platform which ultimately affected both the primary and secondary failover (back-up) systems. Currently, all incoming messages are queued in our system and we expect to deliver messages to customers on a rolling basis as we bring the systems back online. Teams across all levels of our organization remain intensely focused on the restoration efforts. Unfortunately, we do not expect services to be restored today. We do understand the impact this is having on our customers, which is why we have deployed every resource possible to working this issue. While we are focused on restoring email access as quickly as possible, the multiple components and processes that make up our email system require care, and some time, to bring them back online. Our next scheduled update is 3:00 pm, however we will update this alert with new information as we have it.
Need I say more than the fact that Cox is the worst 'utility providers' company I am dealing with?
I hate having to do business with this company but they are a virtual monopoly in this city.
Friday, December 14, 2012
Ode to atheism
Today's news about the 27 victims of an an unexplainable act of violence in Connecticut has made me be an even stronger believer than ever that I cannot be anything but an atheist.
We are simple mammals that have evolved the way we are and manage to maintain our society 'normal' by the simple law of large numbers. We developed and embraced the concept of God to substitute for our inability to accept that we are finite.
Scientifically and statistically speaking we exist by pure coincidence and if events like today's can happen then so can we.
No God in any universe can be used to justify what happened today in Connecticut. Never.
Adam Lanza, the alleged perpetrator of this crime, was a human being who killed other humans using technology and laws accepted as 'modern' in this country.
We cannot allow a repeat of this type of tragedy. We need to use human powers (laws, government, justice, and society artifacts) to stop anybody from ever doing what Adam Lanza did today.
Using divinity to justify Adam's actions should be left for the weak amongst us. It is time for us, The People, to fix the gun laws in America and drastically restrict gun ownership.
We are simple mammals that have evolved the way we are and manage to maintain our society 'normal' by the simple law of large numbers. We developed and embraced the concept of God to substitute for our inability to accept that we are finite.
Scientifically and statistically speaking we exist by pure coincidence and if events like today's can happen then so can we.
No God in any universe can be used to justify what happened today in Connecticut. Never.
Adam Lanza, the alleged perpetrator of this crime, was a human being who killed other humans using technology and laws accepted as 'modern' in this country.
We cannot allow a repeat of this type of tragedy. We need to use human powers (laws, government, justice, and society artifacts) to stop anybody from ever doing what Adam Lanza did today.
Using divinity to justify Adam's actions should be left for the weak amongst us. It is time for us, The People, to fix the gun laws in America and drastically restrict gun ownership.
Another tragic government failure
Today, 20 innocent children and adults were massacred by a young man in Connecticut. Our tears cannot bring these children back and nobody's tears can console their parents.
This is an example of complete and utter government failure. Innocent children being murdered mercilessly by an armed man should not happen in a civilized society. Never and under no circumstances.
The government should protect the weakest among us. Anybody daring to claim that we have the constitutional right to carry guns in this country and that this is a purely 'isolated' incident are at least insane. This could have been prevented if guns would have been much harder to come by.
Guns do not kill people but people with guns can kill people (including children) at a much faster rate than with almost any other kind of weapon.
Rules about the health and state of mind of anybody who has guns need to be much stricter and much better enforced. Also, rules about the sales of guns need to be changed and new rules about the storage of guns in private hands need to be created. The sooner the better.
Currently, in Chicago, one cannot have a gun, but in the suburbs anybody can buy a gun which then can be sold to thugs in Chicago. NRA and other gun rights advocates claim that Chicago is a clear example of the failure of gun control regulations. Can you believe that? Anybody can drive to Iowa or Indiana and buy a gun and return to Chicago and kill innocent victims at will.
We need new rules for gun ownership and we need them now as the type of massacre that happened today can be repeated at any time and almost by anybody.
This is an example of complete and utter government failure. Innocent children being murdered mercilessly by an armed man should not happen in a civilized society. Never and under no circumstances.
The government should protect the weakest among us. Anybody daring to claim that we have the constitutional right to carry guns in this country and that this is a purely 'isolated' incident are at least insane. This could have been prevented if guns would have been much harder to come by.
Guns do not kill people but people with guns can kill people (including children) at a much faster rate than with almost any other kind of weapon.
Rules about the health and state of mind of anybody who has guns need to be much stricter and much better enforced. Also, rules about the sales of guns need to be changed and new rules about the storage of guns in private hands need to be created. The sooner the better.
Currently, in Chicago, one cannot have a gun, but in the suburbs anybody can buy a gun which then can be sold to thugs in Chicago. NRA and other gun rights advocates claim that Chicago is a clear example of the failure of gun control regulations. Can you believe that? Anybody can drive to Iowa or Indiana and buy a gun and return to Chicago and kill innocent victims at will.
We need new rules for gun ownership and we need them now as the type of massacre that happened today can be repeated at any time and almost by anybody.
Thursday, December 13, 2012
The Fed is the Most Powerful Branch of the US Government
As we all know so well, we have 3 basic constitutional powers: legislative, executive, and judiciary. Only 2 of them, legislative and executive (within limits), can affect the economy in very direct ways.
Regulations, national budget, taxes, incentives, subsidies, exemptions, and foreign policy are but a few of the ways the government affects us in very tangible ways.
The judiciary power cannot do too much about the economy as the courts are simple post facto arbiters.
The poor state of our economy is causing ripple effects in our lives, from employment opportunities, healthcare decisions, housing, and transportation to political choices and wealth distribution.
As of now, we cannot make decisions on next year's budget as we are not sure what the tax rates are going to be and we do not know that because 2 branches of our government have failed to perform their constitutional duties. It is bizarre that even though there are so many uncertain components in economic planning the ones we need to worry the most about elate to the government actions (or lack thereof).
The legislative and executive branches of our government have failed to perform their jobs and have been failing persistently over the past several years. The leaders of these government branches cannot agree whether they should say 'Hi' or 'Hello' when they meet and we pay the consequences.
Under the massive clouds of uncertainty on the functioning of the legislative and executive branches, one branch of the government, not even sanctioned by the US Constitution, has emerged more powerful than ever.
That branch is the Federal Reserve System (The Fed). The Fed is the most powerful branch of the US government and without Fed's actions over the past 5 years the US would have literally sunk into an extraordinarily deep recession and, quite possibly, into a depression. Is this branch controlled by the people? No. Is it accountable to the people? Very indirectly and ineffectively.
The Fed has the full power and capability to create economic crises, to favor political specific parties over other parties, to massively influence credit availability and size (the blood of capitalism), and the ability to affect international trade via currency and exchange rates manipulation.
The Fed is a government within the government. It has control over the health of the banking system (legislative power), controls the monetary mass and credit (executive), and recommends sanctions when banks do not do what they are expected to do (judicial).
The actual processes the Fed uses to perform its actions are semi-occult and based on questionable science that imply that governments 'live forever' and, consequently, the money supply can be infinite under some specific conditions.
Regulations, national budget, taxes, incentives, subsidies, exemptions, and foreign policy are but a few of the ways the government affects us in very tangible ways.
The judiciary power cannot do too much about the economy as the courts are simple post facto arbiters.
The poor state of our economy is causing ripple effects in our lives, from employment opportunities, healthcare decisions, housing, and transportation to political choices and wealth distribution.
As of now, we cannot make decisions on next year's budget as we are not sure what the tax rates are going to be and we do not know that because 2 branches of our government have failed to perform their constitutional duties. It is bizarre that even though there are so many uncertain components in economic planning the ones we need to worry the most about elate to the government actions (or lack thereof).
The legislative and executive branches of our government have failed to perform their jobs and have been failing persistently over the past several years. The leaders of these government branches cannot agree whether they should say 'Hi' or 'Hello' when they meet and we pay the consequences.
Under the massive clouds of uncertainty on the functioning of the legislative and executive branches, one branch of the government, not even sanctioned by the US Constitution, has emerged more powerful than ever.
That branch is the Federal Reserve System (The Fed). The Fed is the most powerful branch of the US government and without Fed's actions over the past 5 years the US would have literally sunk into an extraordinarily deep recession and, quite possibly, into a depression. Is this branch controlled by the people? No. Is it accountable to the people? Very indirectly and ineffectively.
The Fed has the full power and capability to create economic crises, to favor political specific parties over other parties, to massively influence credit availability and size (the blood of capitalism), and the ability to affect international trade via currency and exchange rates manipulation.
The Fed is a government within the government. It has control over the health of the banking system (legislative power), controls the monetary mass and credit (executive), and recommends sanctions when banks do not do what they are expected to do (judicial).
The actual processes the Fed uses to perform its actions are semi-occult and based on questionable science that imply that governments 'live forever' and, consequently, the money supply can be infinite under some specific conditions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)